The author is indebted to Jeffrey C. Alexander, Eva Illouz, and Philip Smith for their invaluable input on this study in various stages. The author also thanks Annika Arnold, Kristian B. Karlson, Matthew Lawrence, Laura Rienecker, and Samuel D. Stabler, as well as the Yale University Supper Culture Club participants, for their close reading and insightful comments on previous versions of this article. The article greatly benefited from the comments provided by three anonymous reviewers at Sociological Inquiry.
Uneasy Settlements: Reparation Politics and the Meanings of Money in the Israeli Withdrawal from Gaza†
Article first published online: 23 DEC 2013
© 2013 Alpha Kappa Delta: The International Sociology Honor Society
Volume 84, Issue 2, pages 294–315, May 2014
How to Cite
Dromi, S. M. (2014), Uneasy Settlements: Reparation Politics and the Meanings of Money in the Israeli Withdrawal from Gaza. Sociological Inquiry, 84: 294–315. doi: 10.1111/soin.12028
- Issue published online: 17 APR 2014
- Article first published online: 23 DEC 2013
Negotiations about reparations tend to take the language of interests and to deal primarily with monetary compensation for disadvantaged groups. In such proceedings, aggrieved claimants are likely to make a variety of claims about the use of money to represent their experience, ranging from demands for increased compensation to rejections of the entire process altogether. This article draws attention to the communicative functions of money in the reparation process. It claims that actors may grudgingly agree to attach a monetary value to what they hold sacred, but simultaneously strive to preserve their sense of self-worth and to elicit identification by raising moral critiques about the use of fiscal logic. To exemplify, the article focuses on the 2005 removal of Jewish-Israeli settlers from Israeli-occupied territories. It shows that settlers indeed demanded to be compensated fiscally for their lost property. At the same time, it shows that they raised objections to the use of fiscal logic in representing their experience and offered alternate logics of evaluation. The settlers resisted shame and devaluation through such competing logics, demanding that the state reaffirm a positive and embracing relationship with them despite its decision to evict them.